With a high office view out to Seattle's new City Hall, and a low opinion of goings-on inside, an acquaintance recently delivered a "modest proposal" on the future of the Alaskan Way Viaduct: Walk away from it and let God decide.

The proposal was part tongue in cheek: Would God be merciful or wrathful, mused my friend, when it comes to timing the earthquake that brings down the 1950s-vintage viaduct?

But a portion of it was practical: The state would save more than $2 billion to commit at once to a rebuild of state Route 520, the equally earthquake-threatened route across Lake Washington.

My friend sent multiple e-mails the next day, insisting that the "modest proposal" was off the record. "Humor has not been part of the viaduct debate," he argued.

Oh come now!

As the Seattle City Council meets today to decide whether to hold a public vote, I'm tempted to ask the famous question posed by Casey Stengel when he managed the 1962 New York Mets: Can anyone here play this game?

It turns out my friend's proposal might possibly be transformed into public policy.

Rejecting the tunnel vision of city fathers (and mothers), Gov. Chris Gregoire has given the Emerald City a choice: Accept a rebuild of the viaduct, or state money will be moved to state Route 520.

With a plan in place, replacement of the overcrowded Evergreen Point Bridge would be off and running. We could avoid the ultimate "Montlake Mess," namely what could happen if a quake collapses the west end of the bridge.

Seattle would be left to its own devices, but then that is a frightening prospect.

We're talking about tremors, but the Alaskan Way Viaduct saga almost makes for a remake of the film "Twister."

The structure was badly shaken in the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake. Another half-minute, said Transportation Secretary Doug MacDonald, and the waterfront would have collapsed. It's what happened to the Cypress Viaduct in Oakland back in 1989, killing 42 people.

Six years after the Nisqually, all sides say inaction is not an option. But an epic political feud has checkmated action.

A Democratic mayor and all-Democrat City Council have lined up behind a $4.6 billion tunnel, retreating only lately to a tunnel-lite option. Senior Seattle legislators, Democrats led by the House speaker, have turned thumbs down on Big Dig-Northwest.

The usually decisive Gregoire punted the decision last month, calling for a vote of Seattle citizens. Mayor Greg Nickels and the council were cool to an election, understandably in that polls show Seattle voters preferring a rebuild to a tunnel.

At a meeting Wednesday, Gov. Gregoire wanted a vote to take place in March, well before the Legislature's adjournment date. City officials insisted on an April date, giving them time to find some argument to sway voters in favor of the tunnel.

The governor threw up her hands on the vote and came out of the meeting with her rebuild-or-else ultimatum.

By Wednesday afternoon, Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis was advocating that the council call for a vote -- in March. "If we don't go in March, the Legislature will pre-empt us," he argued.

Consistency has not been a hallmark of this debate. A statement by Nickels denounced the tunnel option during hizzoner's winning 2001 election campaign. He has since shown a convert's fanaticism in pushing for Big Dig-NW.

The city's political splintering was on full display Wednesday.

Ceis was trying to line up council support for a March 13 tunnel vs. rebuild vote. He promised that the mayor would abide by its outcome, while holding out hope that a vote would bolster Nickels' position.

Two Seattle port commissioners, Lloyd Hara and Bob Edwards, dumped all over tunnel-lite and said they would oppose any effort to give $200 million of the port's "taxpayer money" to defray its costs.

They argued that the smaller tunnel, reduced to four lanes from six, would disrupt port traffic along the waterfront from the Duwamish to Ballard, and jeopardize what is left of Seattle's maritime economy.

"Let's get moving with replacing the viaduct now," said Edwards. "The replacement will have more capacity for transit, cars and freight. It will be far less costly. And it will be safer."

And the Peoples Waterfront Coalition -- which would tear down the viaduct but not build a replacement structure -- called on its members to show up at the council meeting and oppose any election.

A vote is "not appropriate," said co-founder Cary Moon in an e-mail that provided talking points to the troops.

Dealing with this gang makes herding cats look easy.

One more irony: The vote-or-no-vote meeting takes place at the end of a week that began with a fancy blow-your-own-horn session in which the City Council touted past deeds and goals for the coming year.

What must voters elsewhere in the state be thinking?

In 2005, they did the responsible thing, rejecting Initiative 912 and affirming a 9.5-cent-a-gallon gas tax hike to pay for $8.5 billion in transportation upgrades.

The biggest ticket items: the Alaskan Way Viaduct and S.R. 520.

"We can't afford to wait any longer," cried an anti-912 Web site, warning of quakes.

Let's hope that God is entertained by farce and folly.

Soundoff (Read 39 comments)
What do you think?